Guidelines for Reporting Outcomes in Trial Protocols

医学 协议(科学) 报告审判综合标准 透明度(行为) 梅德林 临床试验 结果(博弈论) 医学教育 家庭医学 替代医学 医学物理学 计算机科学 病理 数理经济学 政治学 法学 计算机安全 数学
作者
Nancy J. Butcher,Andrea Monsour,Emma J. Mew,An‐Wen Chan,David Moher,Evan Mayo‐Wilson,Caroline B. Terwee,Alyssandra Chee-A-Tow,Ami Baba,Frank Gavin,Jeremy Grimshaw,Lauren E. Kelly,Leena Saeed,Lehana Thabane,Lisa Askie,Maureen Smith,Mufiza Farid‐Kapadia,Paula Williamson,Péter Szatmári,Peter Tugwell
出处
期刊:JAMA [American Medical Association]
卷期号:328 (23): 2345-2345 被引量:301
标识
DOI:10.1001/jama.2022.21243
摘要

Importance: Complete information in a trial protocol regarding study outcomes is crucial for obtaining regulatory approvals, ensuring standardized trial conduct, reducing research waste, and providing transparency of methods to facilitate trial replication, critical appraisal, accurate reporting and interpretation of trial results, and knowledge synthesis. However, recommendations on what outcome-specific information should be included are diverse and inconsistent. To improve reporting practices promoting transparent and reproducible outcome selection, assessment, and analysis, a need for specific and harmonized guidance as to what outcome-specific information should be addressed in clinical trial protocols exists. Objective: To develop harmonized, evidence- and consensus-based standards for describing outcomes in clinical trial protocols through integration with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) 2013 statement. Evidence Review: Using the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) methodological framework, the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the SPIRIT 2013 statement was developed by (1) generation and evaluation of candidate outcome reporting items via consultation with experts and a scoping review of existing guidance for reporting trial outcomes (published within the 10 years prior to March 19, 2018) identified through expert solicitation, electronic database searches of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Methodology Register, gray literature searches, and reference list searches; (2) a 3-round international Delphi voting process (November 2018-February 2019) completed by 124 panelists from 22 countries to rate and identify additional items; and (3) an in-person consensus meeting (April 9-10, 2019) attended by 25 panelists to identify essential items for outcome-specific reporting to be addressed in clinical trial protocols. Findings: The scoping review and consultation with experts identified 108 recommendations relevant to outcome-specific reporting to be addressed in trial protocols, the majority (72%) of which were not included in the SPIRIT 2013 statement. All recommendations were consolidated into 56 items for Delphi voting; after the Delphi survey process, 19 items met criteria for further evaluation at the consensus meeting and possible inclusion in the SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension. The discussions during and after the consensus meeting yielded 9 items that elaborate on the SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist items and are related to completely defining and justifying the choice of primary, secondary, and other outcomes (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 12) prospectively in the trial protocol, defining and justifying the target difference between treatment groups for the primary outcome used in the sample size calculations (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 14), describing the responsiveness of the study instruments used to assess the outcome and providing details on the outcome assessors (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 18a), and describing any planned methods to account for multiplicity relating to the analyses or interpretation of the results (SPIRIT 2013 statement checklist item 20a). Conclusions and Relevance: This SPIRIT-Outcomes 2022 extension of the SPIRIT 2013 statement provides 9 outcome-specific items that should be addressed in all trial protocols and may help increase trial utility, replicability, and transparency and may minimize the risk of selective nonreporting of trial results.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
小马甲应助nnn采纳,获得10
2秒前
爱壹帆完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
3秒前
流川枫完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
ding应助羽化成仙采纳,获得10
4秒前
科研通AI6.2应助mfewf采纳,获得10
7秒前
lan发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
8秒前
8秒前
ccc发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
熊敏发布了新的文献求助10
11秒前
Hello应助麻辣烫采纳,获得10
12秒前
12秒前
充电宝应助芬枫疯采纳,获得10
13秒前
Ava应助芬枫疯采纳,获得10
13秒前
852应助芬枫疯采纳,获得10
13秒前
rrr应助追寻电源采纳,获得20
13秒前
14秒前
14秒前
65935604完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
16秒前
DJC完成签到,获得积分10
18秒前
18秒前
李健的小迷弟应助Zever采纳,获得10
19秒前
dy完成签到,获得积分10
19秒前
羽化成仙发布了新的文献求助10
20秒前
20秒前
21秒前
21秒前
hujuan发布了新的文献求助30
21秒前
夏小川完成签到,获得积分10
22秒前
李健应助杨大帅气采纳,获得10
22秒前
ALTOUCH发布了新的文献求助10
22秒前
23秒前
23秒前
orixero应助YQ666采纳,获得10
23秒前
RJ发布了新的文献求助10
24秒前
24秒前
韩莎发布了新的文献求助10
24秒前
愤怒的茗茗完成签到,获得积分10
24秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Principles of town planning: translating concepts to applications 1000
Navigating Normative Orders. Interdisciplinary Perspectives 800
1 Peter and Christ's Descent to the Dead in Its Early Christian Reception 700
Organizational Behavior 510
Management and the Arts 510
Matrix Methods in Data Mining and Pattern Recognition Second Edition 510
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 内科学 物理 复合材料 催化作用 细胞生物学 无机化学 光电子学 物理化学 电极 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7740588
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 9289179
关于积分的说明 20194410
捐赠科研通 7318705
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3306476
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2458738
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2316607